A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Nikon D70 issues/questions Vs. Canon



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 13th 05, 09:27 PM
Skip M
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Nikon D70 issues/questions Vs. Canon

"DD (Rox)" wrote in message
...
In article tir3f.1431$UF4.1260@fed1read02,
says...

Well, here's something for you to chew on: on Friday last week I popped
into one of the local photographic shops and I was fiddling around with
the 5D, chatting to the manager. I asked him how much interest he had in
the camera and he said that he had taken about 10 orders for it, but
amazingly all of them were from people who were not regular
photographers. They were mostly rich folks who had bought the camera
(with one of the crappy kit lenses) because it was the newest thing and
they had to had it.


The only "kit" I've heard of for the 5D is a European bundle with the
24-105
f4L IS, hardly a "crappy kit lens." C'mon, Dallas, at least try for a
little objectivity. I was talking to the manager of the local Calumet,
yesterday, and his comments were pretty much diametrically opposed to
those
of your store manager, most of the interest is from people like me, part
time pros or full time pros who can't justify the cost of the 1Ds MkII.


I was talking about the 28-135mm and 28-105m zoom lenses. I look at
those as being nothing more than kit lenses, normally recommended by the
sales person.

There certainly is a lot of interest in the 5D from people who would
like to own one, but as I said all the orders he has taken are from
people who can *afford* one, none of whom are photographers in the true
sense.

"Objectivity"? My objectivity for Canon went down the same hole as the
thousands of dollars I wasted buying into the brand in the first place.
Thieves. That's what they are. Conniving thieves who will ever see
another cent of my hard earned dough.

--
DD (everything is temporary)
www.dallasdahms.com


Well, it was hard to tell that you meant the 28-135, since it is hardly
"crappy," either. It's a good lens, and a good match for the 5D, too.
Dallas, it's nice you discovered your mistake in time to tell all the world
about how bad Canon's equipment is. Now is about time to take a break,
because you are starting to sound like StevieG/George Preddy. No Canon
mention can go unremarked upon by you and your vitriol are sadly misplaced.
I've enjoyed some of the interplay with you, but your inferences about the
people who are buying the 5D are probably wide of the mark, and not
appreciated.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com


  #2  
Old October 14th 05, 01:37 AM
MarkČ
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Nikon D70 issues/questions Vs. Canon

Skip M wrote:
"DD (Rox)" wrote in message
...
In article tir3f.1431$UF4.1260@fed1read02,
says...

Well, here's something for you to chew on: on Friday last week I
popped into one of the local photographic shops and I was fiddling
around with the 5D, chatting to the manager. I asked him how much
interest he had in the camera and he said that he had taken about
10 orders for it, but amazingly all of them were from people who
were not regular photographers. They were mostly rich folks who
had bought the camera (with one of the crappy kit lenses) because
it was the newest thing and they had to had it.

The only "kit" I've heard of for the 5D is a European bundle with
the 24-105
f4L IS, hardly a "crappy kit lens." C'mon, Dallas, at least try
for a little objectivity. I was talking to the manager of the
local Calumet, yesterday, and his comments were pretty much
diametrically opposed to those
of your store manager, most of the interest is from people like me,
part time pros or full time pros who can't justify the cost of the
1Ds MkII.


I was talking about the 28-135mm and 28-105m zoom lenses. I look at
those as being nothing more than kit lenses, normally recommended by
the sales person.

There certainly is a lot of interest in the 5D from people who would
like to own one, but as I said all the orders he has taken are from
people who can *afford* one, none of whom are photographers in the
true sense.

"Objectivity"? My objectivity for Canon went down the same hole as
the thousands of dollars I wasted buying into the brand in the first
place. Thieves. That's what they are. Conniving thieves who will
ever see another cent of my hard earned dough.

--
DD (everything is temporary)
www.dallasdahms.com


Well, it was hard to tell that you meant the 28-135, since it is
hardly "crappy," either. It's a good lens, and a good match for the
5D, too. Dallas, it's nice you discovered your mistake in time to
tell all the world about how bad Canon's equipment is. Now is about
time to take a break, because you are starting to sound like
StevieG/George Preddy. No Canon mention can go unremarked upon by
you and your vitriol are sadly misplaced. I've enjoyed some of the
interplay with you, but your inferences about the people who are
buying the 5D are probably wide of the mark, and not appreciated.


Dallas and I called a truce some time back...and then enjoyed playful
banter.
But he's not entered into full Troll mode, and it's becoming tiresome.
-Nearly plonked him a couple days ago...


  #3  
Old October 14th 05, 01:53 AM
MarkČ
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Nikon D70 issues/questions Vs. Canon

MarkČ wrote:
Skip M wrote:
"DD (Rox)" wrote in message
...
In article tir3f.1431$UF4.1260@fed1read02,
says...

Well, here's something for you to chew on: on Friday last week I
popped into one of the local photographic shops and I was fiddling
around with the 5D, chatting to the manager. I asked him how much
interest he had in the camera and he said that he had taken about
10 orders for it, but amazingly all of them were from people who
were not regular photographers. They were mostly rich folks who
had bought the camera (with one of the crappy kit lenses) because
it was the newest thing and they had to had it.

The only "kit" I've heard of for the 5D is a European bundle with
the 24-105
f4L IS, hardly a "crappy kit lens." C'mon, Dallas, at least try
for a little objectivity. I was talking to the manager of the
local Calumet, yesterday, and his comments were pretty much
diametrically opposed to those
of your store manager, most of the interest is from people like me,
part time pros or full time pros who can't justify the cost of the
1Ds MkII.

I was talking about the 28-135mm and 28-105m zoom lenses. I look at
those as being nothing more than kit lenses, normally recommended by
the sales person.

There certainly is a lot of interest in the 5D from people who would
like to own one, but as I said all the orders he has taken are from
people who can *afford* one, none of whom are photographers in the
true sense.

"Objectivity"? My objectivity for Canon went down the same hole as
the thousands of dollars I wasted buying into the brand in the first
place. Thieves. That's what they are. Conniving thieves who will
ever see another cent of my hard earned dough.

--
DD (everything is temporary)
www.dallasdahms.com


Well, it was hard to tell that you meant the 28-135, since it is
hardly "crappy," either. It's a good lens, and a good match for the
5D, too. Dallas, it's nice you discovered your mistake in time to
tell all the world about how bad Canon's equipment is. Now is about
time to take a break, because you are starting to sound like
StevieG/George Preddy. No Canon mention can go unremarked upon by
you and your vitriol are sadly misplaced. I've enjoyed some of the
interplay with you, but your inferences about the people who are
buying the 5D are probably wide of the mark, and not appreciated.


Dallas and I called a truce some time back...and then enjoyed playful
banter.
But he's not entered into full Troll mode, and it's becoming tiresome.
-Nearly plonked him a couple days ago...


Oops!
That SHOULD have said, "He's NOW entered into full Troll Mode!!!!!"


  #4  
Old October 14th 05, 04:03 AM
Skip M
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Nikon D70 issues/questions Vs. Canon

"MarkČ" mjmorgan(lowest even number wrote in message
news:ckD3f.1629$UF4.821@fed1read02...
MarkČ wrote:
Skip M wrote:
"DD (Rox)" wrote in message
...
In article tir3f.1431$UF4.1260@fed1read02,
says...

Well, here's something for you to chew on: on Friday last week I
popped into one of the local photographic shops and I was fiddling
around with the 5D, chatting to the manager. I asked him how much
interest he had in the camera and he said that he had taken about
10 orders for it, but amazingly all of them were from people who
were not regular photographers. They were mostly rich folks who
had bought the camera (with one of the crappy kit lenses) because
it was the newest thing and they had to had it.

The only "kit" I've heard of for the 5D is a European bundle with
the 24-105
f4L IS, hardly a "crappy kit lens." C'mon, Dallas, at least try
for a little objectivity. I was talking to the manager of the
local Calumet, yesterday, and his comments were pretty much
diametrically opposed to those
of your store manager, most of the interest is from people like me,
part time pros or full time pros who can't justify the cost of the
1Ds MkII.

I was talking about the 28-135mm and 28-105m zoom lenses. I look at
those as being nothing more than kit lenses, normally recommended by
the sales person.

There certainly is a lot of interest in the 5D from people who would
like to own one, but as I said all the orders he has taken are from
people who can *afford* one, none of whom are photographers in the
true sense.

"Objectivity"? My objectivity for Canon went down the same hole as
the thousands of dollars I wasted buying into the brand in the first
place. Thieves. That's what they are. Conniving thieves who will
ever see another cent of my hard earned dough.

--
DD (everything is temporary)
www.dallasdahms.com

Well, it was hard to tell that you meant the 28-135, since it is
hardly "crappy," either. It's a good lens, and a good match for the
5D, too. Dallas, it's nice you discovered your mistake in time to
tell all the world about how bad Canon's equipment is. Now is about
time to take a break, because you are starting to sound like
StevieG/George Preddy. No Canon mention can go unremarked upon by
you and your vitriol are sadly misplaced. I've enjoyed some of the
interplay with you, but your inferences about the people who are
buying the 5D are probably wide of the mark, and not appreciated.


Dallas and I called a truce some time back...and then enjoyed playful
banter.
But he's not entered into full Troll mode, and it's becoming tiresome.
-Nearly plonked him a couple days ago...


Oops!
That SHOULD have said, "He's NOW entered into full Troll Mode!!!!!"


Yeah, I made that translation/transition! ;-) And I agree, he's not even
maintaining the level of objectivity that Douglas has.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com


  #5  
Old October 14th 05, 04:08 AM
MarkČ
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Nikon D70 issues/questions Vs. Canon

Skip M wrote:
"MarkČ" mjmorgan(lowest even number wrote in message
news:ckD3f.1629$UF4.821@fed1read02...
MarkČ wrote:
Skip M wrote:
"DD (Rox)" wrote in message
...
In article tir3f.1431$UF4.1260@fed1read02,
says...

Well, here's something for you to chew on: on Friday last week I
popped into one of the local photographic shops and I was
fiddling around with the 5D, chatting to the manager. I asked
him how much interest he had in the camera and he said that he
had taken about 10 orders for it, but amazingly all of them
were from people who were not regular photographers. They were
mostly rich folks who had bought the camera (with one of the
crappy kit lenses) because it was the newest thing and they had
to had it.

The only "kit" I've heard of for the 5D is a European bundle with
the 24-105
f4L IS, hardly a "crappy kit lens." C'mon, Dallas, at least try
for a little objectivity. I was talking to the manager of the
local Calumet, yesterday, and his comments were pretty much
diametrically opposed to those
of your store manager, most of the interest is from people like
me, part time pros or full time pros who can't justify the cost
of the 1Ds MkII.

I was talking about the 28-135mm and 28-105m zoom lenses. I look
at those as being nothing more than kit lenses, normally
recommended by the sales person.

There certainly is a lot of interest in the 5D from people who
would like to own one, but as I said all the orders he has taken
are from people who can *afford* one, none of whom are
photographers in the true sense.

"Objectivity"? My objectivity for Canon went down the same hole as
the thousands of dollars I wasted buying into the brand in the
first place. Thieves. That's what they are. Conniving thieves who
will ever see another cent of my hard earned dough.

--
DD (everything is temporary)
www.dallasdahms.com

Well, it was hard to tell that you meant the 28-135, since it is
hardly "crappy," either. It's a good lens, and a good match for
the 5D, too. Dallas, it's nice you discovered your mistake in time
to tell all the world about how bad Canon's equipment is. Now is
about time to take a break, because you are starting to sound like
StevieG/George Preddy. No Canon mention can go unremarked upon by
you and your vitriol are sadly misplaced. I've enjoyed some of the
interplay with you, but your inferences about the people who are
buying the 5D are probably wide of the mark, and not appreciated.

Dallas and I called a truce some time back...and then enjoyed
playful banter.
But he's not entered into full Troll mode, and it's becoming
tiresome. -Nearly plonked him a couple days ago...


Oops!
That SHOULD have said, "He's NOW entered into full Troll Mode!!!!!"


Yeah, I made that translation/transition! ;-) And I agree, he's not
even maintaining the level of objectivity that Douglas has.


Even Dallas says he's no longer objective.
-Go figure what he hoped to accomplish by announcing that...
?
-It does simplify the formation of opinions regarding his posts, though...



  #6  
Old October 14th 05, 06:29 AM
DD (Rox)
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Nikon D70 issues/questions Vs. Canon

In article CiF3f.1650$UF4.1597@fed1read02, "MarkČ" mjmorgan(lowest
even number says...


Well, it was hard to tell that you meant the 28-135, since it is
hardly "crappy," either. It's a good lens, and a good match for
the 5D, too. Dallas, it's nice you discovered your mistake in time
to tell all the world about how bad Canon's equipment is. Now is
about time to take a break, because you are starting to sound like
StevieG/George Preddy. No Canon mention can go unremarked upon by
you and your vitriol are sadly misplaced. I've enjoyed some of the
interplay with you, but your inferences about the people who are
buying the 5D are probably wide of the mark, and not appreciated.

Dallas and I called a truce some time back...and then enjoyed
playful banter.
But he's not entered into full Troll mode, and it's becoming
tiresome. -Nearly plonked him a couple days ago...

Oops!
That SHOULD have said, "He's NOW entered into full Troll Mode!!!!!"


Yeah, I made that translation/transition! ;-) And I agree, he's not
even maintaining the level of objectivity that Douglas has.


Even Dallas says he's no longer objective.
-Go figure what he hoped to accomplish by announcing that...
?
-It does simplify the formation of opinions regarding his posts, though....


Funny how you Canon guys get upset to the point of plonking when someone
disses your precious brand.

I couldn't care if you do, but it certainly won't stop me from telling
it like it is.

BTW, Skip, that 28-135mm lens is only good for amateurs who don't know
any better. Hardly something I would recommend to someone who is serious
about photography.

And Mark, if dissing Canon is called trolling in your book, what's Bret
guilty of everytime he disses Nikon?

--
DD (everything is temporary)
www.dallasdahms.com
  #7  
Old October 14th 05, 07:29 AM
MarkČ
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Nikon D70 issues/questions Vs. Canon

DD (Rox) wrote:
In article CiF3f.1650$UF4.1597@fed1read02, "MarkČ" mjmorgan(lowest
even number says...


Well, it was hard to tell that you meant the 28-135, since it is
hardly "crappy," either. It's a good lens, and a good match for
the 5D, too. Dallas, it's nice you discovered your mistake in
time to tell all the world about how bad Canon's equipment is.
Now is about time to take a break, because you are starting to
sound like StevieG/George Preddy. No Canon mention can go
unremarked upon by you and your vitriol are sadly misplaced.
I've enjoyed some of the interplay with you, but your inferences
about the people who are buying the 5D are probably wide of the
mark, and not appreciated.

Dallas and I called a truce some time back...and then enjoyed
playful banter.
But he's not entered into full Troll mode, and it's becoming
tiresome. -Nearly plonked him a couple days ago...

Oops!
That SHOULD have said, "He's NOW entered into full Troll Mode!!!!!"


Yeah, I made that translation/transition! ;-) And I agree, he's not
even maintaining the level of objectivity that Douglas has.


Even Dallas says he's no longer objective.
-Go figure what he hoped to accomplish by announcing that...
?
-It does simplify the formation of opinions regarding his posts,
though...


Funny how you Canon guys get upset to the point of plonking when
someone disses your precious brand.


That had nothing to do with it.
I nearly plonked you when you made your ridiculous "shadow" comment.
I don't know who you are, Dallas.
You don't have to like Canon. I like Nikon. I like Pentax. I like lots of
brands. The only difference here is that you are clearly incapable of being
even remotely objective about anything any more. You seem to take some sort
of new-found pride in coming up with new ways of stating your hatred for a
*brand.* This is not only intellectually embarrassing for you, but also
indicative of someone who appears incapable of rational thought on the
subject.

I have gone to great lengths to speak with balance regarding various brands.
You, on the other hand, have taken to wearing your lack of objectivity like
a badge of honor. It's not. It merely paints you as a fool who can't rise
above his emotions, and his tiny little corner of thought.

I couldn't care if you do, but it certainly won't stop me from telling
it like it is.

BTW, Skip, that 28-135mm lens is only good for amateurs who don't know
any better. Hardly something I would recommend to someone who is
serious about photography.


Please point to images that demonstrate you've somehow moved beyond the
quality of that particular lens, Dallas. I've looked at your sight, and I
can't find a basis for your opinion in this regard. What can you show in
this regard? What have you seen in your lenses that leads you to declaring
crap on anything else.

To your likely dismay...I have posted recently how my 24-70 leaves my old
28-135 behind in terms of sharpness...but I have spoken with measured,
comparative language. You, on the other hand, speak with foam frothing from
your mouth. I've lost all respect for your opinion because you've chosen a
self-declared lack of objectivity.

And Mark, if dissing Canon is called trolling in your book, what's
Bret guilty of everytime he disses Nikon?


Humor. He's guilty of goading, blatant...humor.
-Something you clearly don't have.
We all know Bret's schtick. You don't have a schtick, Dallas. It's just
you.
I remeber WAAAY back when Bret first started posting...I gave him crap all
the time.
-Then after a time it became clear what he was up to, and it turned into
entertainment...not to mention a number of spurts of decent photography.
You, on the other hand, are just turning into an arse.
You aren't funny, Dallas, and you don't show evidence of anything other than
your own bitterness. You merely come off as a guy who got a black eye from
the South African Canon Service Center...and as a result, has set aside
sanity to continue your mindless ravings against a brand. You have become
the poster child for why brand wars are reserved for fools.

Regarding "dissing..."
Even I have "dissed" Canon, you boob. Did you read my thread about whether
the 5D was/is over-priced for it's build quality? -About the lack of this
and that? Did you read my loudly expressed displeasure with Canon's
handling of 20D problems way back when--even though I don't own one? --When
Nikon announced specs for their new generation of topline DSLR a year or so
ago...guess who started a new thread, glowingly expressing how impressed he
was?? -That was me, Dallas. -You know...the Canon worshipper (or so you
claim).

So you see, DD...Roxy...Dallas...whoever the heck you are...
You have proven only that when it comes to discussions of equipment, you are
a closed-minded, bitter man...hell-bent on your own version of reality that
leads you to robotic responses of mindless anti-blatherings.

Other than that...You're not a bad guy.



  #8  
Old October 14th 05, 09:42 AM
DD (Rox)
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Nikon D70 issues/questions Vs. Canon

In article 2fI3f.1674$UF4.484@fed1read02, "MarkČ" mjmorgan(lowest
even number says...

Funny how you Canon guys get upset to the point of plonking when
someone disses your precious brand.


That had nothing to do with it.
I nearly plonked you when you made your ridiculous "shadow" comment.


Ridiculous? Not really. Just obvious. Whenever I say something about
Canon, there you are, like the proverbial shadow.

I don't know who you are, Dallas.


I don't know who any of the people on this forum are, but I can classify
them segmentally with the greatest of ease.

You don't have to like Canon. I like Nikon. I like Pentax. I like lotsof
brands. The only difference here is that you are clearly incapable of being
even remotely objective about anything any more. You seem to take some sort
of new-found pride in coming up with new ways of stating your hatred for a
*brand.* This is not only intellectually embarrassing for you, but also
indicative of someone who appears incapable of rational thought on the
subject.


I also like Pentax and I also like Olympus. But I will not tolerate
people saying that Canon is superior to anything else because as I have
proved over and over again, that is bull****. There is *nothing* special
about Canon. Sadly this goes against the thought processes of yourself
and a few others around here and you get uptight about it.

I have gone to great lengths to speak with balance regarding various brands.
You, on the other hand, have taken to wearing your lack of objectivity like
a badge of honor. It's not. It merely paints you as a fool who can't rise
above his emotions, and his tiny little corner of thought.


Unlike you and the rest of the Canon worshipers I have used Nikons and
Canons extensively. In fact I was just working it out that out of the 5
years I have been sick with photograhpy disease, 3 of them were spent
using Canon equipment. So I have effectively had more experience with
Canon than I have with Nikon.

A tiny corner of thought? I don't think so, Mark. A LOT of thought has
gone into the comments I make about how crap the Canon consumer line is.

I couldn't care if you do, but it certainly won't stop me from telling
it like it is.

BTW, Skip, that 28-135mm lens is only good for amateurs who don't know
any better. Hardly something I would recommend to someone who is
serious about photography.


Please point to images that demonstrate you've somehow moved beyond the
quality of that particular lens, Dallas. I've looked at your sight, and I
can't find a basis for your opinion in this regard. What can you show in
this regard? What have you seen in your lenses that leads you to declaring
crap on anything else.


Mark...you're going to have to do better than that, m'boy. Let us begin
by you telling me what it is about my published images that leaves you
in any mind as to the notion that I don't know what I am talking about?
Are you saying the images are ****? If so, tell me how, because from
where I stand every one of them is way, way better than the snapshots
you have posted to Pbase. I say that with conviction.

I don't claim to be in the same league as someone like Simon Stanmore,
for instance, but I am a lot better than most of the people who have the
cheek to call themselves professional photographers. Of that there is no
doubt in my mind.

To your likely dismay...I have posted recently how my 24-70 leaves my old
28-135 behind in terms of sharpness...but I have spoken with measured,
comparative language. You, on the other hand, speak with foam frothing from
your mouth. I've lost all respect for your opinion because you've chosena
self-declared lack of objectivity.


The 28-135mm Canon lens is a very soft lens compared to most consumer
grade Nikkors I have used with similar focal lengths (I have never used
a 24-120mm though).

But all that is besides the point, because you, like so many other
psuedo photo experts, seem to think that you can tell how good a lens is
simply by looking at a jpeg posted to the internet. FWIW, the images I
have on my site come from a variety of different sources...digital SLR's
(3 types), film SLR's (about 5 types) and rangefinders (1 type). At
least 10 different lenses too. I challenge you to tell me what equipment
took what shot.

And Mark, if dissing Canon is called trolling in your book, what's
Bret guilty of everytime he disses Nikon?


Humor. He's guilty of goading, blatant...humor.
-Something you clearly don't have.


But you just said you don't know me, so how can you make a statement
like that in the same post?

We all know Bret's schtick. You don't have a schtick, Dallas. It's just
you.
I remeber WAAAY back when Bret first started posting...I gave him crap all
the time.
-Then after a time it became clear what he was up to, and it turned into
entertainment...not to mention a number of spurts of decent photography.
You, on the other hand, are just turning into an arse.
You aren't funny, Dallas, and you don't show evidence of anything other than
your own bitterness. You merely come off as a guy who got a black eye from
the South African Canon Service Center...and as a result, has set aside
sanity to continue your mindless ravings against a brand. You have become
the poster child for why brand wars are reserved for fools.


At least I am not a nerd.

Regarding "dissing..."
Even I have "dissed" Canon, you boob. Did you read my thread about whether
the 5D was/is over-priced for it's build quality? -About the lack of this
and that? Did you read my loudly expressed displeasure with Canon's
handling of 20D problems way back when--even though I don't own one? --When
Nikon announced specs for their new generation of topline DSLR a year or so
ago...guess who started a new thread, glowingly expressing how impressed he
was?? -That was me, Dallas. -You know...the Canon worshipper (or so you
claim).

So you see, DD...Roxy...Dallas...whoever the heck you are...
You have proven only that when it comes to discussions of equipment, you are
a closed-minded, bitter man...hell-bent on your own version of reality that
leads you to robotic responses of mindless anti-blatherings.


I never blather. I speak the truth. Some people can't handle the truth.
Are you among them?

Other than that...You're not a bad guy.


Too late for that.

--
DD (everything is temporary)
www.dallasdahms.com
  #9  
Old October 14th 05, 11:18 AM
Douglas...
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Nikon D70 issues/questions Vs. Canon

MarkČ wrote:

So you see, DD...Roxy...Dallas...whoever the heck you are...
You have proven only that when it comes to discussions of equipment, you are
a closed-minded, bitter man...hell-bent on your own version of reality that
leads you to robotic responses of mindless anti-blatherings.

Other than that...You're not a bad guy.



Feel better now, Mark?

--
Douglas...
Specifications are good to read but
When it comes to judging Digital Cameras...
I'm in the "how do the pictures look" category.
  #10  
Old October 14th 05, 12:45 PM
Alex
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Nikon D70 issues/questions Vs. Canon

On Fri, 14 Oct 2005 07:29:41 +0200, DD (Rox)
wrote:

BTW, Skip, that 28-135mm lens is only good for amateurs who don't know
any better. Hardly something I would recommend to someone who is serious
about photography.


I guess Robert Farber isn't as serious about photography as I
thought...
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...books&n=507846



--
Alex
atheist #2007
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Nikon D70 issues/questions Vs. Canon [email protected] Digital SLR Cameras 611 November 20th 05 04:04 PM
Nikon User to Canon help me I'm slipping... Richard Favinger, Jr. Digital SLR Cameras 141 April 29th 05 02:52 PM
A fully manual dSLR [email protected] Digital Photography 130 April 18th 05 04:00 AM
Lift off with the Nikon D70!!! Dallas 35mm Photo Equipment 132 August 23rd 04 06:37 PM
FA: Camera Collectibles for Auction on e-Bay: NIKON CANON PENTAX MINOLTA TAMRON z-ride General Equipment For Sale 0 October 22nd 03 10:17 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:16 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.